Thursday, June 05, 2008
Potter was right, Bailey was wrong?
Flip, flop:
After years of arguing that expanded credit is critical for the poor, and attacking banks for "red-lining" poor and minority districts, the liberal-left of this country has reversed directions, and has decided that the poor can't handle credit.
Or maybe it is that the left adjusts its position so that business is always "wrong."
3 Comments:
, at
You just figured this out?
I myself got in a roaring fights months ago with both ends of the spectrum: (1) A person in the financial industry who repeated for the too-many-th time the now-common-wisdom among the money people that "most Americans shouldn't own their own home; they should rent" because they're not capable of handling the responsibility [wrong] and (2) A leftie genius who was talking about how the subprime loan crisis was the result of "fraud" by the banks and mortgage companies [also wrong].
The subprime "crisis" is the result of salesmen being told to sell mortgages without sufficient underwriting standards being applied to their handiwork, and a lack of sufficient underwriting standards arose from an excess of stupid dollars willing to chase the higher interest rates without pausing to evaluate the risk (or not being concerned about it). Same thing happened in the '80s, back when bank-mortgage-lenders actually bore the responsibility for the risk. The gov't fixed that problem, but then didn't intervene when Wall Street found a way to divorce the risk from the initiators and send it way down the CDO line.
Dumbasses.
By randian, at Fri Jun 06, 07:46:00 AM:
The left has always been fairly condescending to the people from whom it wants patronage.
, at
"the left adjusts its position so that business is always "wrong."
That rings true.
The communists in California protested the Chinese delegation in Anaheim when I was kid, because the diplomats were visiting Disneyland.
Or as Dennis Praeger said, "The world doesn't hate America, the left hates America.